Novel variation on traditional poker

ABSTRACT

A new variation to standard poker card games is provided involving the initial dealing of a token to each contestant in a tournament prior to the initial hand being played. The token may then be utilized by the holder at anytime after an individual hand has been fully played by all contestants and an initial winner is determined at that time. Such a token allows the holder to include the token within the pot of such an individual hand in order to have a subsequent card dealt in order to improve, potentially, any remaining contestant&#39;s hand. Additionally, different variations including the utilization of such a token as well as the utilization of such a poker variation with electronic and on-line gaming systems is encompassed within the invention as well.

REFERENCE TO PRIOR RELATED APPLICATION

The current application is a conversion of and claims the benefit of theprior filing date of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/429,432,filed on Jan. 3, 2011. Said application is incorporated entirely byreference herein.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This invention pertains to a new variation to standard poker card games.Such a variation involves the initial availability of a token to eachcontestant in a tournament prior to the initial hand being played. Thetoken may then be utilized by the holder at anytime after an individualhand has been fully played by all contestants and an initial winner isdetermined at that time. Such a token then allows the holder to includethe token within the pot of such an individual hand in order to have asubsequent card dealt in order to improve, potentially, any remainingcontestant's hand. As a basic rule, if the dealt extra card then causesa change in terms of the individual hand winner, the initial winnerloses half of the pot to the subsequent winner who also takes the tokento use in the future as needed. If no change occurs, then the initialwinner takes the entire pot including the token (or, alternatively, thetoken is then removed from play, leaving only those contestants stillholding tokens with the potential to utilize such a tool in futurehands). Such token play is unavailable if the initial winner's handcannot be overcome with a single card. Additionally, differentvariations including the utilization of such a token (including, forexample, the ability to use two tokens simultaneously in order to havean extra card dealt solely for the benefit of the token player alone,rather than for the potential benefit of all contestants still alive inan individual hand), as well as the utilization of such a pokervariation with electronic and on-line gaming systems is encompassedwithin the invention as well.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Poker has evolved over the last two-hundred years from a regional gameof chance with limited numbers of cards to the worldwide phenomenon oftoday with multiple variations of a standard 52-card deck, played incasinos, homes, and other locations quite extensively. As well, with theadvent and spread of the internet, poker has enjoyed an incredible boostin popularity due to the ease with which a person may take part inon-line games. From its rather humble beginnings in the Louisiana delta,through its spread via riverboat gambling throughout the United States,to its well-documented basis in the “wild west,” poker has grown tobecome the primary card game of skill and chance in the betting world.

The game itself has evolved from a simple 3- or 4-card comparisonconfiguration to include a number of different variations, all based onthe premise of having contestants account for risks to place bets thatone individual's final hand upon presentment to the table is better thanall others. In such systems, however, a bettor (contestant) may also tryto raise the stakes too high for all others to continue, or at least tosuch an extent that such other players do not believe their own handswould win in comparison. In essence, though, the game of poker is, asalluded to above, one of both chance (in terms of the cards dealt) aswell as skill (to determine the best betting strategies in order to,again, either maximize a return in comparison with other contestants'hands or to force or even bluff others to fold).

In each type of poker variation, however, the game comprises a dealerdealing cards to each contestant and, ultimately, the contestantsutilizing such dealt cards to compare their individual hands with thoseof such other contestants. The most popular poker variation in the worldtoday is Texas Hold'Em, a game in which multiple contestants eachreceive two hidden cards during each round (or hand). Prior to dealingsuch hidden cards, two contestants are required to place antecontributions to the pot, one with half the contribution of the other,depending on the specific betting levels set at the time during theround at issue (basically, such a scenario guarantees that a base potamount is present and that each contestant will eventually have tocontribute a minimum amount to the pot in order to stay at the table).After the initial deal of such hidden cards (e.g., cards that are dealtface down for each individual contestant to view on their own and awayfrom view of all other contestants at the table), the contestants areallowed to place initial bets as to the strength of their cards movingforward prior to seeing any further community cards. Once the bets areset at the same levels across the table, the dealer then lays down threeface up community cards which form the basis of a comparison hand incombination with each contestant's hidden cards. This first deal, termedthe “flop” thus provides the next basis for which the remainingcontestants can then place bets on the strength of their own hiddencards in addition to the first three community cards (all contestantsmay utilize the community cards, in other words to add to their ownhands for comparison purposes and thus from which to establish astrategic betting posture). Subsequent to settling the betting levels atthat point, the dealer then deals one more face up community card (the“turn”) to further establish a betting platform for the remainingcontestants. A final card, the “river,” then settles the table in termsof the comparison hands of the betting contestants and thus bets aremade accordingly in order to, again, force a comparative showing ofhidden cards, or to force all other contestants to fold due to aperceived lack of strength of one's hand in relation to the bettinglevel of another. In any event, such a poker variation has been wellestablished for many years and has a set protocol and basic rulebook interms of card dealing and order in terms of betting. Other variations ofpoker are widespread and well-known, as well, such as draw poker (5-carddraw, for instance, where the hands are all hidden to each contestantand the best five card hand is bet upon, with each contestant having theability to give up and “draw” up to five cards in each hand to improvehand strength), stud poker (where each hand has multiple rounds withface up cards dealt in some and face down in others, thus allowingcontestants to see certain component cards of others' hands during thebetting process), and Omaha poker (which is, itself, a variant of TexasHold'Em, but with four hidden cards, instead of two, and the requirementthat each contestant must utilize at least two of her own hidden cardsto complete a betting hand; no such requirement exists in TexasHold'Em). Such poker variations have themselves evolved over many yearsto those now commonly played and understood. Importantly, however, suchvariations have enjoyed great popularity over time due to acceptedchanges from the basic poker games in the past. Poker's popularity, inother words, has been incumbent upon the ability to provide an exciting,challenging, and, over all, enjoyable game that continues to garner newfans and contestants as time passes.

Stagnation as to the standard protocols of different variations has,over the years, led to a decrease in popularity, unfortunately, ofcertain poker variations. Draw poker was once the most popular type ofpoker, due to ease in understanding the rules involved as well as thelevel of sophistication practiced by most contestants outside of thecasino industry. With the reach of legal betting locations increasingover the years, the more esoteric variations of poker spread as well.Thus, what started as a very limited group of participants within thetournament known as the World Series of Poker (the “WSOP”), television,then cable, then the internet caused a significant increase in notorietyof the base game, Texas Hold'Em, even to the extent that somecontestants have become household names due to their success stories andvery large tournament winnings. As it is, the increased interest in theWSOP led to a reduction in interest in draw poker to the point thatTexas Hold'Em far exceeds all other variations in popularity. Such ashift, though, shows that even the well-established variations may loseluster due a combination of issues, certainly, but apparently primarilydue to, again, stagnation as to the set rules and ultimate results.Excitement and change in the poker world may not be simple to provide,but, at least in terms of possible stagnation in popularity (such as dueto over-saturation in mass media), modifications of existing variations,or entirely new variations of poker games may be needed to retain thelevel of interest the poker industry now enjoys. For example, althoughit remains a very popular variant, interest in Texas Hold'Em has alreadybeen noticeable from its zenith in the early 2000s due to excessivepresentations in mass media. At this point in time, though, a newvariation, that could be introduced within any previous variation ofpoker, would be important to, at least, allow for poker to remain arobust, internationally popular game of skill and chance by providingsomething new without changing too much of the previously highly popularvariations themselves.

To that end, there have been very few suggestions within the gamingworld to inject any sort of effective and exciting changes into pokervariations. For instance, there have been possibilities introduced forcontestants to purchase insurance prior to each hand in order to reducethe level of betting loss after each successive hand. In that manner,each contestant may have the capability to use any part of their ownchip amount to make such a purchase prior to the deal of the next hand.Such a situation, by its very nature, however, favors a contestant withthe largest chip level from which to draw an amount for such aninsurance purpose. As such, a level playing field is not in existence atthat point, further giving the contestant with the chip lead greaterleverage to effectively end the overall tournament (game) sooner.Another variety of this “insurance” scenario includes the ability ofcontestants to purchase tokens before each hand in order to request anextra card to be dealt for their sole benefit after all other hands havebeen shown. Again, though, such a situation is skewed in favor of thecontestant with the most chips at that point; invariably, thatcontestant will have the resources to make such a purpose in each round(hand), thus effectively creating a situation that any contestant withan early lead can then start buying such insurance or extra tokens toend the entire game as early as possible, thus removing much of thechance (and skill, for that matter) needed to make such a pokervariation fair in the first place.

To the contrary, what would be needed to continue the growth and spreadof poker is a way to ensure that all the status of participatingcontestants is always determined by betting play and card dealing (e.g.,at the start, everything is provided that can then be utilized forbetting, etc., as desired throughout the game at issue) and that if anyextra cards are desired for hand comparison purposes, then, if thecontestant has met all required criteria, such an alternative may beexercised. As it is, again, the lack of a level playing field in thattype of situation renders the prior attempts at introducing certainsubsequent card dealing steps to such prior poker variations inadequateand unfair. Without a starting status providing the overall level field,but also all the alternative tools available to allow for any suchmodifications to the basic and prior poker variation rules, thepossibility to alter such prior variations to any extent, and at leastto one that will at least provide an increase in interest and excitementdue to unexpected and potentially valuable single hand changes during anentire game, there is simply not anything provided in the prior art thatwould create the necessary excitement to such an end. Thus,unfortunately, to date, there is lacking any such potentiallygame-changing variation in the poker field, at least to the extent thatthe basic popular game variations are still in place, but discrete andmomentary possible modifications may be introduced. Such a distinctneed, at least in terms of providing an evolving alternative for thecurrent popular poker variations throughout the gaming world today, hasyet to be seen. The inventive poker variation thus overcomes these priordeficiencies to generate a new poker variation component that may beutilized with any number of poker variations.

ADVANTAGES AND SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

One distinct advantage of the present invention is the capability of apoker contestant to take further risks in order to improve upon a losinghand, thus injecting the potential for greater excitement intoindividual hands (or rounds). Another advantage of this inventive systemand method is the simplicity of selling (or possibly, dealing) tokens toeach contestant prior to a tournament, thereby placing each player onthe same level and with the same capability of utilizing her token atany appropriate time. Yet another advantage of this inventive pokervariation is the versatility of such a token system to apply to allcommon poker variations through the creation of an extra card dealwithin a community context, thus not only potentially aiding the tokenplayer, but also all other remaining contestants during the hand inquestion. Still another advantage of this novel variation is theresultant passing of such a token to the determined winner of the extracard hand, thus allowing such a contestant to utilize such a token inthe future. Still another advantage of this novel poker variation is theability to utilize this pre-dealt token configuration with differentsituations, if desired, in order to further interject variety into theskill and chance components of different poker games.

Accordingly, this invention is directed to a poker game variationincluding the steps of:

a) prior to the dealing of the first round of a poker game including aplurality of contestants, an extra card token is made available fordistribution to each contestant, wherein at least one contestant takespossession of an extra card token in this manner;

b) a first round and any number of successive rounds are then playedwith appropriate betting by contributing monetary amounts into acommunity pot and comparison of resultant individual hands to determinea winning hand according to acceptable card combination hierarchy,wherein, at any time once an initial individual winning hand isdetermined within a round after each remaining hand at that time isshown in total for review by each contestant, any remaining contestantpossessing an extra card token may then place said token into the pot inorder to have one further community card dealt for all remainingcontestants to utilize in combination with their own individual handssuch that any such remaining contestant may improve their individualhand in order to defeat the initial individual winning hand;

wherein said extra card token may only be played by a remainingcontestant if the initial individual winning hand of another remainingcontestant may be bested in terms of hand strength by the inclusion of asingle card in combination with the token-playing contestants initialhand; and wherein if such extra card combines with an initial hand ofany remaining contestant provides the strongest hand in comparison withthe hands of all other remaining contestants, then such hand is deemedthe subsequent individual winning hand, allowing for the holder of suchsubsequent individual winning hand to be awarded at least a portion ofthe pot for that hand; and wherein if said extra card causes two or morecontestants to have the same hand strength, and thus to have the sameeffective subsequent individual winning hand, and thus exceeding thehand strength of the initial individual winning hand, then saidcontestants holding such subsequent winning hands are to be awarded asplit of at least a portion of the pot for that hand.

Different variants of this standard method include the following, whollydependent on the selection of any such variation by the contestantsinvolved: a) the contestant with the initial individual winning hand isguaranteed a payout of at least half of the pot regardless of the resultgenerated by the combination of said extra card with any other remainingcontestant's hand; b) the necessity of the extra card to generate abetter hand than that held by the contestant (rather than, for example,a tie) with the initial individual winning hand in order to allow forany payout of the round pot to any contestant other than the holder ofthe initial individual winning hand; c) another possible variationwherein a tie with the initial individual winning hand generates apayout for the other contestant of 25% of the pot; d) the completeovertaking of the initial individual winning hand to the extent that theholder of a subsequent individual winning hand would receive all of thepot winnings, rather than just 50% thereof; e) the possibility ofmultiple extra card tokens to be played by multiple contestants during around, effectively allowing for more than one extra card to be dealtsubsequent to the determination of the initial individual winning hand;f) a contestant with multiple tokens may play such multiple tokens torequest an extra card that is solely available for their combinationwith their own hand; g) the contestant that holds the subsequentindividual winning hand retains the extra card token for furtherpotentially utilization during said overall game; h) any extra cardtoken that is played is further removed from play for the remainder ofthe tournament; and i) any combinations of such variations that areconsistent with one another.

Such an inventive token system can be utilized with all standard pokervariations, including Texas Hold'Em, Omaha, draw, and stud, through theability of the token player to request, in exchange for the token itselfplaced into the pot, such one last card to be dealt for the potentialbenefit of all remaining contestants during the hand in question. Thesedifferent methods of utilizing the pre-dealt token(s) thus providefurther potential excitement and interest within existing pokervariations by prolonging the final determination of a round and allowingfor certain contestants one final attempt to overcome a certain losinghand. Thus, the overall utilization of a token distribution procedureprior to the first hand of a poker tournament, thereby placing allcontestants on the same level and with the same capability to request anextra card after a round has been initially set and a winning handdetermined, is the basis of and is encompassed within this invention.

The token itself may be of any actual material and/or configuration. Forthe present invention, the game utilizing such a pre-dealt token iscalled “Ocean” (as a variation on the final community card presented inTexas Hold'Em, the “river”) and the token is known as the “Ocean token.”Although an actual coin-like piece may be utilized for such a purpose,at the very least, such a token should be distinguishable from otherpieces and equipment present at a poker table (such as poker chips,cards, etc.) and noticeable to all contestants as the actual token beingpresented for such a specific purpose. Thus, without any intention oflimiting such a potential form of such a token, preferably such a tokentakes the form of a round coin-like piece that is shiny and having adiameter about twice the size of the largest size chip at the table atissue. Again, as noted above, the number of such tokens available forplay at any table will be limited to the number of contestants qualifiedto play prior to the dealing of the first hand.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

A better understanding of the present invention will be had when a morespecific description is provided below as to a specific poker hand. Sucha depiction is for a presentation of the potentially preferredembodiments of the invention and is not intended to limit the breadth ofthe invention in any manner. The ordinarily skilled artisan would havesufficient understanding and respect for this specific art in order toconsider the true breadth of the invention itself in relation to theoverall descriptions.

The following terms are intended to have the specific meaning ascribedin relation to this invention:

“round” or “hand” indicates each individual deal of cards to determine awinning combination held by a contestant; multiple “rounds” or “hands”constitute a “game” or “tournament.” “Pre-dealt” is used in conjunctionwith the extra card token and means distribution to contestants prior tothe dealing of a first “hand” or “round” during a “game” or“tournament.” “Extra card token” thus means the “Ocean token” as itpermits the contestant playing such a token to request an extra card tobe dealt subsequent to the determination of an initial individualwinning hand. “Initial individual winning hand” thus means the bestcomparison hand held by a contestant during any single “hand” or “round”prior to any further action in relation to the play of an “extra cardtoken.” “Subsequent individual winning hand” thus relates to the winninghand determined after an extra card has been dealt in response to theplay of an “extra card token.” The term “contestant” denotes aparticipant in a poker game or tournament that is sitting at the sametable (either in person or on-line) as all others in the same game ortournament. A “remaining contestant” is one that has decided to continuewith a hand and thus to call all bets during a component of a round;such a participant may fold during a round to remove themselves from thestatus of “remaining contestant” during a hand or round, but will stillremain as a “contestant” for the overall game or tournament.

Fans of poker, particularly Texas Hold'Em, will no doubt understand theexcitement that is generated upon the uncertainty of contestants' handsprior to the presentation of the “river” card during a round.Particularly if two or more contestants have decided to go “all-in” interms of their available betting chips (or other resources) and thusshow their cards in total prior to the dealing of the “river” card, thepotential for an unexpected and/or odds-on unlikely card to be dealt inthat respect creates a setting of excitement for a contestant hoping towin such a hand (and with the odds in her favor at that moment) as wellas a long-shot hope for any other with far less odds on their side. Theability to generate such excitement and uncertainty can thus becompounded with the availability of the “Ocean Token” variation,effectively extending a potential game and causing certain contestantsto rethink strategies and develop a different system and manner ofbetting, bluffing, etc., without abandoning the basic strictures of thetexas Hold'Em game itself As well, as noted above, such a token systemallows for such refinement and extension of all other well-known pokervariations, too, thus not only creating the potential for greaterexcitement overall (with the “end” of a round not necessarily the “end”due to the potential for a contestant to request one further card inthis respect), but also providing impetus to create new strategies as tothe utilization and possible expectation of competitors undertaking sucha token alternative as a last-ditch effort to extend their owntournament lives. With that in mind, below is presented one possiblehand (or, again, round) that involves the initial determination of awinning hand then the playing of an “ocean token” to extend the round.Again, it is important to note, that although this refers to a TexasHold'Em round (as part of a tournament or game, of course), this tokenmethod may be utilized with any standard poker game variation to muchthe same effect. Furthermore, it is again important to note that thecontestants involved received their own tokens (or were at least giventhe option to purchase a token at the table) prior to the dealing of thefirst hand of the pertinent game or tournament, thus putting all suchcontestants on the same footing and level; there is no purchaseopportunity or other potential for a chip leader to buy any such tokenafter the first hand or round is dealt (thus, the term “pre-dealt”referring to the extra card tokens distributed for this purpose).

In terms of hand strength hierarchy, it is important to note thefollowing from lowest to highest, with the actual card values based onthe number on the cards (such as a 2 being lower than a 3, with a 10lower than a jack, which is lower than a queen, which is lower than aking, which is lower than an ace): single pair, two pairs, three of akind, straight (direct sequence from a low card to high, regardless ofsuit), flush (five of the same suit), full house (three of a kind and apair), four of a kind, and a straight flush. An ace may be used in astraight or flush as a high card (above a king) or a low card (below a2). If a minimum of a pair is not present, then the hand with thehighest card is considered the winning hand. Thus, if one contestant hasa 2, 3, 5, 7, and king, without a flush, then their hand would be basedupon the king's value alone; if another contestant thus has a 2, 3, 5,7, and ace (again, without a flush), then this other contestant wouldhave the better hand with the ace being a higher value than the king.

Example

In a standard, 10-seated Texas Hold'Em poker tournament, the contestantsare all initially given the option to purchase extra card tokens priorto the start of the tournament; all such contestants exercised such anoption. At a point in the overall tournament, four contestants remain tosee the flop for a given hand (6 have thus chosen not to proceed pastthe deal of their own hidden cards), including both blinds (seats 1 and2 in relation to the dealer at that moment; as alluded to above, theblinds are the contestants that contribute to the pot each hand, one aset amount and the other one-half of that set amount), the hijackposition (seat 8), and the dealer (seat 10). The flop is dealt as the 8of clubs, the 8 of diamonds, and the 10 of hearts. A round of bettingensues with the contestant at seat 1 leading out with a pot-sized bet(here, 100 tournament chips for the sake of simplicity). All otherplayers call (contributing 100 chips each), making the pot a total of500 chips for the moment. The turn is dealt being the 9 of clubs, andanother round of betting ensures with the contestant at seat 1 againmaking the same pot-sized bet. All other contestant call, again, makingthe pot 2500 chips. The river is then dealt being the 7 of spades andanother round of betting ensues in the same manner, leaving a total of12,500 chips in the round pot. At that point, with all contestantscalling to the same bet level, the showdown commences with thecontestants all showing their hidden cards to establish their overallhands in relation to the community cards presented in the flop, turn,and river. Seat 1 thus exposes an 8 of hearts and a 3 of clubs, thusresulting in three 8s. Seat 2 shows the 10 of spades and the 2 ofdiamonds, thus showing two pairs of 10s and 8s. Seat 8 has a Jack ofclubs and 10 of clubs, thus resulting in a Jack-high straight with a 7,8, and 9 from the community cards. Seat 10 has a Jack of diamonds andthe Queen of hearts, thus resulting in a Queen-high straight, and thusresulting in the initial individual winning hand (since a straight beatsthree of a kind, and the Queen is of higher value than the Jack of Seat8′s hand). In this situation, however, each other contestant has thecapability of beating the initial individual winning hand as Seat 1could have four of a kind with another 8, Seat 2 could have a full housewith another 10, and Seat 8 could obtain a straight flush with either a7 or Queen of clubs. Thus, the contestant at Seat 1 is given the optionof playing his token first, which he declines (ostensibly because of thelow odds of improving his own hand in relation to that possible foreither of Seats 2 and 8). Seat 2 declines his option as well, for thesame basic reason. The contestant at Seat 8 then is given the option toplay her token and does so. The dealer then deals the final communitycard as the Queen of clubs. In this variation, then, Seat 8 holds thesubsequent individual winning hand with a straight club flush from 8 toQueen, thereby retaining her “ocean token” and, for this game, winning50% of the pot (with the other 50% going to the initial individualwinning hand holder, the contestant in Seat 10). The other contestants,Seats 1 and 2, lose their bets in total.

Again, as noted above, other variations may be employed that changevarious end results and/or allow for specific actions to be taken. Thus,instead of allowing the initial individual winning hand holder to retain50% of the pot, one variation would permit the subsequent individualwinning hand holder to take 100% of the pot due to the playing of the“ocean token” in such a manner (although, again, such a winning hand maybe held by any other contestant, not just the contestant that played thetoken itself). Such a variation is herein referred to as “Deep Ocean”;again, such a variant may be set by the contestants or the house.

Importantly, the general rule of “Ocean” is that the play of the “Oceantoken” must result in a subsequent individual winning hand held by acontestant other than the initial individual winning hand holder. Usingthe Example above, if the contestant in Seat 8 played her token and thecard was the Queen of diamonds instead of the Queen of clubs, then thebest the Seat 8 contestant could do would be to tie Seat 10. In thatsituation, Seat 10 would be considered the “default” winner overall andwould take the entire pot, token and all. Another variation, however,would allow for the Seat 8 contestant to at least be awarded 25% of thepot instead of nothing, simply because of the chance taken to generateat least a tying hand. This is referred to as “Riptide” (to continue thenautical themes).

A “Tidal Wave” variation allows a holder of multiple tokens to then playat least two tokens to ensure an extra card is dealt but solely for thebenefit of the multiple token playing contestant. Additionally, a“typhoon” variation allows for multiple contestants to play individualtokens during a round, thus increasing the number of extra cards fromone to as many as are available in accordance with the rules. Basically,though, the only way such a variation would be made possible is if eachremaining contestant has a chance, with a single card, to usurp theinitially individually winning hand (much like the scenario presented inthe Example, above); each contestant would then be given the option toplay their token (or tokens) with the initial individual winning handholder given the final chance, if desired, to do so, as well. If such acontestant wins after all tokens and extra cards have been played, thenshe would take the entire pot and all tokens, too.

Combinations of such variations may, again, be employed as well. Again,the important issue is that the tokens are distributed, or at leastprovided on an even basis for purchase by all tournament contestants,prior to any game or tournament, thus ensuring all contestants are onthe same level. As well, if there is no way a contestant could overcomean initial individual winning hand with a single card, then the optionto play such a token is nonexistent for that round.

Although the present invention has been described with a certain degreeof particularity, it is understood that the present disclosure has beenmade by way of example and that changes and details of overall gamestructure may be made without departing from the spirit thereof.

1. A poker game variation including the steps of: a) prior to thedealing of the first round of a poker game including a plurality ofcontestants, an extra card token is made available for distribution toeach contestant, wherein at least one contestant takes possession of anextra card token in this manner; b) a first round and any number ofsuccessive rounds are then played with appropriate betting bycontributing monetary amounts into a community pot and comparison ofresultant individual hands to determine a winning hand according toacceptable card combination hierarchy, wherein, at any time once aninitial individual winning hand is determined within a round after eachremaining hand at that time is shown in total for review by eachcontestant, any remaining contestant possessing an extra card token maythen place said token into the pot in order to have one furthercommunity card dealt for all remaining contestants to utilize incombination with their own individual hands such that any such remainingcontestant may improve their individual hand in order to defeat theinitial individual winning hand; wherein said extra card token may onlybe played by a remaining contestant if the initial individual winninghand of another remaining contestant may be bested in terms of handstrength by the inclusion of a single card in combination with thetoken-playing contestants initial hand; and wherein if such extra cardcombines with an initial hand of any remaining contestant provides thestrongest hand in comparison with the hands of all other remainingcontestants, then such hand is deemed the subsequent individual winninghand, allowing for the holder of such subsequent individual winning handto be awarded at least a portion of the pot for that hand; and whereinif said extra card causes two or more contestants to have the same handstrength, and thus to have the same effective subsequent individualwinning hand, and thus exceeding the hand strength of the initialindividual winning hand, then said contestants holding such subsequentwinning hands are to be awarded a split of at least a portion of the potfor that hand.
 2. The poker game variation as described in claim 1,wherein the contestant with the initial individual winning hand isguaranteed a payout of at least half of the pot regardless of the resultgenerated by the combination of said extra card with any other remainingcontestant's hand.
 3. The poker game variation as described in claim 1,wherein said extra card must generate a better hand than that held bythe contestant with the initial individual winning hand in order toallow for any payout of the pot to any contestant other than the holderof the initial individual winning hand.
 4. The poker game variation asdescribed in claim 1, wherein if said extra card generates a tie in handstrength between the initial individual winning hand and anothercontestant's hand, then said other contestant is awarded a payout of 25%of the pot and the holder of the initial individual winning hand isawarded 75% of the pot and the token.
 5. The poker game variation asdescribed in claim 1, wherein if said extra card generates a subsequentindividual winning hand then the holder of said hand is awarded 100% ofthe pot amount and the token.
 6. The poker game variation as describedin claim 1, wherein multiple extra card tokens may be played by multiplecontestants during a round, effectively allowing for more than one extracard to be dealt subsequent to the determination of the initialindividual winning hand.
 7. The poker game variation as described inclaim 1, wherein a contestant with multiple tokens may play suchmultiple tokens to request an extra card that is solely available fortheir combination with their own hand for comparison with the initialindividual winning hand.
 8. The poker game variation as described inclaim 1, wherein said extra card token played during a hand is handledby one of the three following alternatives: a) passed on to the holderof the subsequent individual winning hand if only one such hand resultsfrom the introduction of the extra card; b) passed on to the holder ofthe initial individual winning hand due to the lack of improved handstrength of any other contestant to overcome such an initial individualwinning hand upon introduction of the extra card; c) passed on to thecontestant playing said token if said contestant has a subsequent handthat at least ties in strength with that of another contestant; or d)said token is removed from play after utilization to generate an extracard during a hand.
 9. The poker game variation as described in claim 1,wherein said variation is employed in a game of poker selected from thegroup consisting of draw poker, stud poker, Texas Hold'Em poker, andOmaha poker.
 10. The poker game variation as described in claim 2,wherein said variation is employed in a game of poker selected from thegroup consisting of draw poker, stud poker, Texas Hold'Em poker, andOmaha poker.
 11. The poker game variation as described in claim 3,wherein said variation is employed in a game of poker selected from thegroup consisting of draw poker, stud poker, Texas Hold'Em poker, andOmaha poker.
 12. The poker game variation as described in claim 4,wherein said variation is employed in a game of poker selected from thegroup consisting of draw poker, stud poker, Texas Hold'Em poker, andOmaha poker.
 13. The poker game variation as described in claim 5,wherein said variation is employed in a game of poker selected from thegroup consisting of draw poker, stud poker, Texas Hold'Em poker, andOmaha poker.
 14. The poker game variation as described in claim 6,wherein said variation is employed in a game of poker selected from thegroup consisting of draw poker, stud poker, Texas Hold'Em poker, andOmaha poker.
 15. The poker game variation as described in claim 7,wherein said variation is employed in a game of poker selected from thegroup consisting of draw poker, stud poker, Texas Hold'Em poker, andOmaha poker.
 16. The poker game variation as described in claim 8,wherein said variation is employed in a game of poker selected from thegroup consisting of draw poker, stud poker, Texas Hold'Em poker, andOmaha poker.
 17. The poker game variation as described in claim 1,wherein said variation is employed in a casino setting.
 18. The pokergame variation as described in claim 1, wherein said variation isemployed in an on-line setting.
 19. The poker game variation asdescribed in claim 9, wherein said variation is employed in a casinosetting.
 20. The poker game variation as described in claim 10, whereinsaid variation is employed in a casino setting.